[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse"

"Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD"

"Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy"

Woodworking and Construction Hacks

"CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination"

"NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law"

"Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing"

Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine

Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn.

After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning

Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate

Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending.

Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar”

"Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny"

"Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is"

Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner.

Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him

South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien

GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis

Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash

New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms

Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania

Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally

"It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala

Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump

Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive'

(Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl

"Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race"

He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage

The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom!

"Kamala’s Inane Talking Points"

"The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics"

Easy Drywall Patch

Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast

In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind"

Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’

Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens

Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer?

hurricanes and heat waves are Worse

'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic

Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump

IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons

Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training

The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses

Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists

Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general

Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep

Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA.

Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report

Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

The Water Cooler
See other The Water Cooler Articles

Title: Ron Paul Rails Against Rick Santorum: ‘We Just Plain Don’t Mind Our Own Business!’
Source: Mediaite.com
URL Source: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rep-ron- ... in-dont-mind-our-own-business/
Published: Aug 12, 2011
Author: Mediaite.com
Post Date: 2011-08-12 01:18:40 by Brian S
Keywords: None
Views: 67670
Comments: 85

The debate began with the two most similar candidates– Minnesotans Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Rep. Michele Bachmann– pulling no punches in disparaging each other’s records. It wouldn’t take long for the two most different candidates to have at it, and the foreign policy conversation between. Rep. Ron Paul and Rick Santorum delivered just as much as the experience one among the Minnesotans.

Rep. Paul brought his vintage A-game to the debate on foreign policy tonight, attacking America’s foreign policy on Iran and arguing that they were entirely justified in wanting nuclear weapons. Arguing that the USSR had nuclear weapons and “they were the greatest danger in our history,” he concluded it made no sense to stop the Iranians, who were not a threat. Oh, and by the way, “that’s why we don’t have trade relations with Cuba,” he added as an aside. “It’s about time we start talking to Cuba and stop these wars that are 30-40 years old.”

At this, Santorum shot up, interrupting Herman Cain’s question to respond as the author of the anti-Iranian bill that riled up Rep. Paul so much. “Iran is not Iceland,” he argued, noting that “Iran has killed more American men and women in uniform than the Iraqis [sic] or Afghans have.” He also added that Iran “is at war with us,” which gave Rep. Paul a comeback opening. “We started it in 1953… we installed the Shah, and the blowback came in 1979… it’s been going on because we just plain don’t mind our own business,” he shouted, to cheers.

The segment via Fox News below:

if (70 > (Math.random() * 100)) bing_spawn('Ron Paul');

- Subscribe to *Tea Party On Parade*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 73.

#4. To: Brian S (#0)

Rep. Paul brought his vintage A-game to the debate on foreign policy tonight, attacking America’s foreign policy on Iran and arguing that they were entirely justified in wanting nuclear weapons.

This is a misrepresentation of what Dr. Paul actually said. He didn't say the Iranians were justified in wanting nuclear weapons, he said the US wasn't justified in stopping them. There is a big difference.

Thunderbird  posted on  2011-08-12   9:19:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: Thunderbird Brian S (#4)

This is a misrepresentation of what Dr. Paul actually said. He didn't say the Iranians were justified in wanting nuclear weapons, he said the US wasn't justified in stopping them. There is a big difference.

What did Ron Paul actually say ... he said:

Why would that be so strange if the Soviets and the Chinese had nuclear weapons, we tolerated the Soviets. We didn't attack them. And they were a much greater danger. They were the greatest danger to us in our whole history. But you don't go to war with them. Just think of how many nuclear weapons surround Iran. The Chinese are there. The Indians are there. The Pakistanis are there. The Israelis are there. The United States is there. All these countries ... why wouldn't it be natural if they might want a weapon? Internationally, they might be given more respect.

OriginalGatlin  posted on  2011-08-12   10:46:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Gatlin (#14)

Why would that be so strange if the Soviets and the Chinese had nuclear weapons, we tolerated the Soviets. We didn't attack them. And they were a much greater danger. They were the greatest danger to us in our whole history. But you don't go to war with them. Just think of how many nuclear weapons surround Iran. The Chinese are there. The Indians are there. The Pakistanis are there. The Israelis are there. The United States is there. All these countries ... why wouldn't it be natural if they might want a weapon? Internationally, they might be given more respect.

He's right - the idea that the Iranians would nuke Israel is pretty silly given the likely response, and the fact that winds would blow fallout back at them. There's no evidence that the Iranians are any more suicidal than the Soviets or North Koreans.

And a desire by the Iranians to want nukes is perfectly understandable given U.S. forces on both their borders while we leave North Korea and Pakistan alone.

go65  posted on  2011-08-12   11:07:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: go65. Brian S, Thunderbird (#17)

Why would that be so strange if the Soviets and the Chinese had nuclear weapons, we tolerated the Soviets. We didn't attack them. And they were a much greater danger. They were the greatest danger to us in our whole history. But you don't go to war with them. Just think of how many nuclear weapons surround Iran. The Chinese are there. The Indians are there. The Pakistanis are there. The Israelis are there. The United States is there. All these countries ... why wouldn't it be natural if they might want a weapon? Internationally, they might be given more respect.

He's right - the idea that the Iranians would nuke Israel is pretty silly given the likely response, and the fact that winds would blow fallout back at them. There's no evidence that the Iranians are any more suicidal than the Soviets or North Koreans.

And a desire by the Iranians to want nukes is perfectly understandable given U.S. forces on both their borders while we leave North Korea and Pakistan alone.

The original point: Ron Paul say the Iranians are justified in wanting/having nuclear weapons?

OriginalGatlin  posted on  2011-08-12   11:15:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Gatlin (#19)

The original point: Ron Paul say the Iranians are justified in wanting/having nuclear weapons?

What he's said is that it is understandable that they would want nukes, that there is no evidence they are working on nukes, and that he opposes sanctions on Iran.

go65  posted on  2011-08-12   11:26:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: go65 (#23)

What he's said is that it is understandable that they would want nukes ...

Yea, I read that ...

He surely did NOT say that is is NOT okay for them to have them, then did he mean that it's okay for them to have them?

I don't know ...

If I were to "guess" ... I would "guess" that he means that it is okay for them to have them. That is what I understood him to say ... I could be wrong.

OriginalGatlin  posted on  2011-08-12   11:38:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Gatlin, *Yukon neo-Progressive Vermin* (#26)

He surely did NOT say that is is NOT okay for them to have them

Yeah, Ron Paul would not even interfere with YOUR ability to defend yourself. But being a neo-progressive statist liberal, you'd like to deny others the tools to defend themselves, wouldn't you?

Hondo68  posted on  2011-08-12   11:50:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: hondo68 (#27)

... you'd like to deny others the tools to defend themselves, wouldn't you?

Nope.

I would however like to deny MUSLIM FANATICS, who continue to kill people and themselves with their suicide bombs, a nuke bomb tool ... wouldn't you?

OriginalGatlin  posted on  2011-08-12   13:35:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: Gatlin (#34)

I would however like to deny MUSLIM FANATICS, who continue to kill people and themselves with their suicide bombs, a nuke bomb tool ... wouldn't you?

Pakistan has one already.

And we seem to all be OK with North Korea having a nuke.

go65  posted on  2011-08-12   13:38:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: go65 (#36)

Pakistan has one already.

And we seem to all be OK with North Korea having a nuke.

So 10 to 20 more countries should have them?

OriginalGatlin  posted on  2011-08-12   14:07:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: Gatlin (#42)

So 10 to 20 more countries should have them?

Who are we to say who can and can't have nuclear weapons?

go65  posted on  2011-08-12   15:10:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: go65 (#47)

Who are we to say who can and can't have nuclear weapons?

We have no right to say that Al-Qaeda and the Taliban can or can't have nuclear weapons?

OriginalGatlin  posted on  2011-08-12   18:06:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#73. To: Gatlin (#59)

We have no right to say that Al-Qaeda and the Taliban can or can't have nuclear weapons?

A bit different - Al Qaeda, with Taliban support, attacked us. I have no problem destroying those who attack us. Iran hasn't attacked us.

go65  posted on  2011-08-13   10:51:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 73.

        There are no replies to Comment # 73.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 73.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com